To be clear, they’re cutting an extra $9.4 Billion in services. Maybe it’s used differently in British English but in the US “claw back” as an idiom generally refers to a win for an underdog party to keep something after a difficult fight, not a privileged party ending access to something.
To be clear, they’re cutting an extra $9.4 Billion in services. Maybe it’s used differently in British English but in the US “claw back” as an idiom generally refers to a win for an underdog party to keep something after a difficult fight, not a privileged party ending access to something.
around here, I generally seen it used to indicate taking money that has already been deposited with the recipient.
That’s not at all what that means.
Claw back implies money (or something else) has already been sent out and is trying to once again be retrieved from the receiving party.
Whoever wrote the title was just trying to insinuate something extra vicious and violent in nature. It’s a common part of our fair and unbiased media.
This is just completely incorrect. Claw back in no way suggests an underdog.